Dismissed¶3

B S Prakash v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Aug 2025WP/22838/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court (Bengaluru), WP No. 22838 of 2025 (KLR-RES), decided 11-08-2025 by R Devdas J; writ petition dismissed for failure to exhaust statutory appellate remedy; challenge to Tahasildar's mutation entries MR No.13/1983-84 and MR No.T54/20192020 and RTC entry for 1967-68 recording acquisition of 12 guntas for Grama Thana, Bilichodu Village, Jagaluru Taluk, Davanagere District; appeal remedy under Section 136(2) Karnataka Land Revenue Act before the Assistant Commissioner; alternative remedy / writ jurisdiction; NC: 2025:KHC:30996.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach the competent appellate authority to redress their grievance; learned HCGP permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks. ¶3

B S Prakash Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:30996 WP No. 22838 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 22838 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

B S PRAKASH

¶11

S/O LATE SIDDAVEERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS R/O BILICHODU VILLAGE, JAGALURU TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

¶12

SUNIL KUMAR B.K. S/O KOTRAPPA B C AGE 45 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS R/O BILICHODU VILLAGE, JAGALURURU TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

¶13

KARTHIKA B.S,

¶14

Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

S/L PARAMESHWARAPPA B S AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS OCC BUSINESS R/O BILICHODU VILLAGE, JAGALURU TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

¶16

KARTHIKA B.S, S/O PARAMESHWARAPPA B.S. AGE 33 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS R/O BILICHODU VILLAGE, JAGALURU TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577553.

¶17

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. HIREMATHAD MAHESHIAH RUDRAYYA., ADVOCATE)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:30996 WP No. 22838 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

AND:

¶22

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE -560 001.

¶23

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶24

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DAVANAGERE.

¶25

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DAVANAGERE.

¶26

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE SUB-DIVISION DAVANAGERE-577528.

¶27

THE TALUK EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYAT JAGALURU, JAGALURU TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577528.

¶28

THE TAHASHILDAR JAGALURU TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577528.

¶29

THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BILICHODU GRAMA PANCHAYAT,

¶30

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:30996 WP No. 22838 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

BILICHODU VILLAGE, JAGALURU TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577528.

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI. SESHU .V., HCGP)

¶36

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING OF THE MANIPULATED ENTRY OF REFLECTING 12 GUNTAS OF LAND HAS BEEN ACQUIRED FOR GRAMA THANA IN RTC FOR THE YEAR 1967-68 AS PER ANEXURE-A CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ORDER OF MUTATION IN M.R. NO.13/1983-84, AS PER ANNEXURE-A-1 AND ETC.,

¶37

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶38

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶39

ORAL ORDER

¶40

Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice

¶41

for respondents No.1 to 3, 5 and 7. Notice to the other respondents is not necessary for the following reasons:

¶42

Learned High Court Government Pleader raises a primary objection that the petitioners are seeking to raise a challenge to mutation entries of the year 1983-84 before this Court without approaching the appellate authority.

¶43

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC:30996 WP No. 22838 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

It is clear from the prayer made in the petition

¶47

that the petitioners are seeking to raise a challenge to mutation entry in MR No.13/1983-84, MR No.T54/20192020, which are orders passed by the Tahasildar. Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act provides for an appeal remedy before the Assistant Commissioner. In that view of the matter, the objections raised by the learned High Court Government Pleader are sustained. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed , while reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent appellate authority to redress their grievance.

¶48

Learned HCGP is permitted to file his memo of

¶49

appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

¶50

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶51

KLY CT: JL

B S Prakash v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B S Prakash v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basavaraju B S Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Bassamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri v Ashwath Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri T S Nagesh Vs State of Karnataka

Savithramma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri P K Shivaram Vs State of Karnataka